Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Theodore Roosevelt's suppressed rifle | Main | As always, we're in the best of hands »

The next big Fourth Amendment issue...

Posted by David Hardy · 20 January 2015 08:30 PM

Police use of radar that can see into a house. In its present form, it can only report on whether someone is inside, and their distance, but as the article notes, more advanced forms are becoming available.

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Bill Twist | January 21, 2015 8:31 AM | Reply

I'm guessing it will by disallowed without a warrant under Kyllo v. United States. If using a passive infrared scanner to detect activity within a house is an intrusive search that requires a warrant, then actively beaming radio waves into the house so that you can see the reflections thereof *MUST* be an intrusive search.

FWB | January 21, 2015 12:36 PM | Reply

We shouldn't even need to go to court. The public servants should be already know that any and all searches require a warrant to be reasonable.

And everyone can thank the courts for screwing everything up. The judges crave power and control and have read so much between the lines that the new judicial version of the constitution is 10x longer than the original.

The 4th is simple. The first and second clauses are dependent. This means that the relationship between reasonable and warrants is inseparable.

And in spite of the corrupt and wrong Barron ruling, there is absolutely no evidence that the 4th does not apply wholly against the states, without resorting to the "pulled out of their arses incorporation doctrine".

Thus every search and seizure must follow the complete 4th which means a warrant for every search and seizure to be reasonable.

The judges DO NOT have a better knowledge of the facts than other folks. The judges have simply lied to the people, who are actually superior to them, and claimed to be in charge. It is high time We stood back up and held the judges accountable. Good behaviour includes adhering properly, i.e. strictly, to the letter of the Constitution.

John Locke asked: "For what is the point of drawing up dumb, silent statements of laws, if anybody may attach a new meaning to the words to suit his own taste, find some remote interpretation, and twist the words to fit the situation and his own opinion?"

Following Locke's words, why the hell was the Constitution written, if the courts can sway everything depending on which way their junk is hanging.

Leave a comment